Posted on 10/03/2005 4:06:25 AM PDT by johnmecainrino
If you define yourself in the same vein as Bush then you are NOT a conservative because he is not either.
I saw a post earlier by MHKing which speaks to this excellent organization; I would like to investigate her involvement with it a bit more, and that alone lends send some hopefulness to this pick.
Your not going to vote? You must not trust President Bush.
I think this is a great choice.
***
From what I am reading, I would say you are in the minority.
Roberts was a stealth candidate and I said, okay, I'll wait and see what happens. But this...a friend and unknown. There were way too many other conservative nominees that would have been an extremely better choice.
What exactly did he say? I didn't hear the actual announcement.
"She's never been married
That's the big warning flag for me. Gotta be something seriously wrong with her."
Maybe she and Souter can get together. How sweet.
Judge Sarah T. Hughes' greatest claim to fame is that she swore Lyndon Johnson into the Presidency aboard Air Force One at Love Field in November, 1963.
Sorry. I should have crossed out the word "NOT".
One good thing I have heard is that Harriet Miers voted against letting the elite liberals at the ABA choosing their pro choice position, she wanted it up to the individual members to choose.
She isn't an intellectual heavyweight but is she turns out to be right of O'Conner I'm sure we will not be as hard on her.
Time will tell, hopefully she is the type that turned conservative latter in life.
OK, I'm glad you admit that you are working with the same information as us mere mortals.
Given that, I see two left-wing organizations on her resume, that she's been a trial lawyer, and has run a lottery. What about these few pieces of information available give you any reason to hope that she will be different from O'Connor or Souter?
Doing more research. Gore said this in 1987
* In a May 26, 1987 letter to a constituent he wrote: "During my 11 years in congress, I have consistently opposed federal funding for abortions. In my opinion, it is wrong to spend federal funds for what is arguably taking of a human life. Let me assure you that I share your belief that innocent human life must be protected, and I am committed to furthering this goal."
In 1988, however, he denied a strong 1984 pro-life vote. Seems like Gore's record was strongly pro-life until 1988. He started to go weak around that time. She voted for him in the primary. He had an overwhelming voting record of being pro-life to that point. But then he decided to run for President in 1988. At that point, the following happened: "By 1988, Gore had caught the political pragmatism virus. As a presidential candidate that year, Gore brazenly denied casting such a vote and claimed in his new incarnation as a pro-choice politician: "I have not changed .... I have always been against anything that would take away a woman's right to have an abortion.'' "http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/thomas020100.asp
If she voted in the primary but not the General Election, we are okay. If she stayed with him after that point, that is troubling.
Why don't you try posting like a grown up?
I see alot of hysteria in the posts that are shamefully similar to the idiotic rants of those beloved libnuts that have been losing elections to us for the last 3 or 4 election cycles.
Calm down folks.
My gut feeling is she's a target to draw the fire of the Rats and thus expose their hate for everyone to see. Then again I'm also quite aware of how loyal Bush is to his appointees so he may be quite serious about pushing this nomination through.
Time will tell....let's see how this plays out...many in this forum thought that Chief Justice Roberts was an awful choice...but he totally chewed up Kennedy did he not? He showed himself to be quite capeable of being an outstanding Chief Justice. I will be watching with great interest as this nomination battle unfolds. Within a few days we'll have a better feel for what's going on.
I find the timing and time of the nomination rather interesting. First thing off on a Monday morning...he makes a nomination...there is a definite political game being played here....do not underestimate Bush's poker playing skills here...or Rove's...they are up to something to mess with the Left.
To quote the poster boy of liberal stupidity, Dan Rather: "Courage Courage Courage"
I never said she wasn't - I only said expediency in the short-term (getting O'Conner replaced within a month) is shortsighted.
However, I'm troubled by many of the items cited on this thread. I would've preferred a known quantity with greater qualifications.
It is reasonable speculation, I believe. Miers made a donation to the DNC 5 days before the Bush/Dukakis election. It doesn't even appear to be a contribution that is associated with her law firm. Those who donate during the final push are the hardcore partisans. I believe that Miers was a very motivated Dukakis supporter in a state that went to Bush.
Gore would have run more strongly in Texas than Dukakis had, because he presented himself as a moderate Southerner, as Carter did in 1976. I would have to question Miers' party affiliation at that time. The support of Bentsen in 1988 would have been a means of opening doors to a powerful Democrat. His GOP opponent in 1988, Beau Boulter, was a conservative Republican who was very much an underdog.
No doubt some old-line Democrats like Phil Gramm have been solid conservatives after moving to the GOP. However, it appears that Miers is more a pragmatist than an ideological conservative.
It's a shame that the pick wasn't already one where time has told.
I don't know a lot about her either, but this is from the Political Journal email from the WSJ last week:
In the early 1990s, she led a fight to get the American Bar Association to reverse its pro-abortion rights policy. She lost."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.